expect Rams to be back in LA next year.

Every time he comes, there is a backward step," Kephart said of NFL Executive Vice President Eric Grubman, who was in Oakland last week. "And if he would just stay the hell out of here, we might actually get a deal done."

Kephart also dismissed the city of Carson's approval this week of a $1.7 billion football stadium 17 miles south of downtown Los Angeles for the Raiders and San Diego Chargers, saying it is nothing more than a ploy to extract concessions out of Oakland andSan Diego.


http://www.mercurynews.com/…/unnecessary-roughness-oakland-…
 
Watched state of the city and most interesting thing said was by Mayor Butts. He said that he had spoken with Eric Grubman long before the announcement in January. Grubman told him then that his stadium plan would not work unless he had an owner and team committed to it. Isn't that interesting?

No other proposed site has what Inglewood has. 1.They have the owner. 2. The owner owns the land. 3.They have the financing. Plus they are on track to start building in December of this year.

From what Butts said about Carson, not only do they have additional clean up of that contaminated land but, they will have to build a system to control the methane gas leaking from that site. I believe the Mayor said the estimated cost to run that system was 300,000.00 per year. So, who is going to eat the 300K per year?
 
Can we say awkward? Yesterday the committee of 6 NFL owners responsible for relocation to LA heard presentations of stadium plans and updates from StL, Ingelwood, and Carson, in that order. First up was StL, Peacock and company tried to impress the committee with new stadium renderings and video of the proposed Riverfront $985 million project. The 30 to 45 min presentation was to show the committee that StL is serious about keeping the Rams (their virtual stadium had Ram colors and Rams written in each end-zone) Now Guess who followed StL? Yup, Stan Kroenke himself presenting for an hour about the $1.86 billion Ingelwood project!!!! I just find it ridiculously funny and ironic that Peacock, after trying to get a Kroenke a stadium meeting for months finally got his wish, but wait a minute, they are on competing sides! How awkward is it that owner of the team you plastered all over your virtual stadium is sitting right there, right there showing the same committee his preferred alternative in LA? Can you imagine the scene in that room? Peacock, Kroenke finally in the same room, but wait, they are on opposite sides on where the Rams will end up. News flash: The number one guy Peacock needs to convince is convincing the same people he's alternative plans for his team. Wow. Peacock can put on his best to the LA 6 committee but without Kroenke first opening his wallet and second signing on the dotted new stadium lease line he is only talking about a theoretical stadium for the Rams! The real applied stadium plans for the Rams where shown after by Stan himself in Ingelwood. I mean Kroenke could have made Peacock's day with one word but instead had a mouthful of them to why hell no. Kroenke's presentation was not just to show the LA 6 committee why Ingelwood, it was also the final one hour long NO to Peacock. These are not just a few tea leaves to read anymore, Kroenke dropped a whole Lipton factory if front of everyone in New York.
LTRISTL please don't share or copy/paste my article on your page. Write your own opinion.
 
It was embarrassing last year when the Rams had a home game, nationally televised, and Steve Young in the pre-game said "nobody is here.we have an owner who wants to move them there."
 
He nailed it.:clap:

here's the real deal Carson still isn't cleaned up they are about to do skematical designs which is 6 months away ( by that time inglewood will be under construction and they still don't have the land everyone here knows Carson is a hoax and oak andad is calling them on it) also the county portion of funds is out without a vote and city portion is in legal limbo so with that said there still no financing in stl and they cannot legally force the Rams to invest in a stadium that they do not want.

Back in 2012 the league set guidelines that any team moving to LA must be 2 team capable have space for NFL network have a theater for the NFL (draft ect ect) and a west coast hall of fame and west coast hq SK in inglewood gives them all this Carson is just a stadium without all that everyone here knows it and knows Carson is a bluff which is why oak and SD is making the NFL work on their time and they are not use to being dictated too that's the point but construction will start in inglewood first week in December and that stadium is owned by the Rams and that property is owned by them so no matter what stl does or Carson it's still not the best option for the NFL if SK is going to give that to the NFL then they will let him put his team there 20 yrs ago your govenor (then attorney general) threatened the NFL with a anti trust lawsuit that the league would have lost and the NFL said that la did not fail at that time and voted against the move but backed down the main POINT IS SK HAS THE LEAGUE BY THE BALLS CASE LAW IS ON HIS SIDE IT DOESNT MATTER WHAT STL DOES they can try to court the raiders if they want but it's beyond obvious no NFL team wants to be there.


Btw Ed Everyone in the state of California knows that the earlies Carson can break ground would be 2018 at the earliest please look it up cuz I feel it's s waste of my time to explain it only the delusional think Carson is real but we all know it's notthat's why grubman and the league is mad because all officials here have called them on thier bs the only real viable plan is inglewood which is 2 yrs ahead of anything stl can come up with and 100x more advanced PEACE OUT!!!

That stadium will not be built without a team committed to it .. Good luck with that.


I was at the State of the City Address in Inglewood this afternoon. The Mayor of Inglewood pretty much laughed at Carson today. Said the site was only 80% remediated and that they had to dig "six stories" worth of dirt out of the entire 167 acres, cover what remains below with a giant plastic tarp, destroy the dirt they took out, then bring in new dirt to lay over the plastic tarp and then cover the entire 167 acres with new dirt. How many cubic tons of dirt is that?? THEN, they have to install a methane gas pumping system that will have to run FOREVER, at a cost of $300,000-400,000 a month, FOREVER. The Mayor didn't seem all that worried about Carson. Estimates say they won't be able to build until after 2017. What a frigging joke!!

indeed.hee hee.
Inglewood Mayor To Tout NFL Stadium Plans In State Of The City Address CBS Los Angeles


Meanwhile, in Inglewood, the stadium begins construction no later than the first week in December "or sooner," according to Mayor James Butts.
 
Last edited:
"Another stadium project, whose plans are much further along, is underway in nearby Inglewood and has St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke as a partner."

http://abcnews.go.com/…/sleek-plans-released-los-angeles-ar…

Sleek New Plans Released for Los Angeles-Area NFL Stadium
New designs released Thursday night for a proposed NFL stadium in the Los Angeles area include simulated lightning bolts for the San Diego Chargers and a flame honoring late Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis. The thoroughly revamped plans for the $1.7 billion joint stadium proposal by the two...
ABCNEWS.GO.COM|BY ABC NEWS
 
Chargers counsel Mark Fabiani says- Carson fully entitled "we 're able to start building as soon as the NFL gives permission to do so." ummm,there's still thta methane gas issue to address no? lol


St. Louis Task Force Expects To Have New Stadium Plans By Early-To-Late Fall - SportsBusiness Daily SportsBusiness Journal SportsBusiness Daily Global

good luck on that,hee hee because........

NFL does not care about Rams future in St. Louis FOX Sports

kevin D.

Rams C.O.O. Kevin Demoff talks future of football FOX2now.com


still living in a fantasyland out there.lol

St. Louis stadium leaders optimistic about their efforts ProFootballTalk

The Carson Stadium is BS! It will take them 5+ years to pump all the methane gas out of the ground.


funny.lol
Progress on stadium front but will Kroenke play ball Sports
 
Last edited:
 
Can anyone imagine the public relations DISASTER for the NFL, Roger Goodell and the rest of the team owners, if this CARSONogen stadium is actually built and the lawsuits start coming when people start getting sick or diagnosed with cancer???

Hell, if I was the NFLPA, I wouldn't let the players STEP FOOT in that toxic place and as a fan I wouldn't get ANYWHERE near that place either!!

http://ktla.com/…/carson-declares-state-of-emergency-over-…/

Yah, great NFL and CARSONogen, let's build a stadium over this!!



landfill methan walmart
 
Yeah baby let's do the math. Rams come back in 2016. Wait 2 years in a temporary venue and sign a 30 year lease in The New Rams stadium which will make most people how old when that lease expires? An owner with his own team, in his own stadium, will dowhat prior to 32 year's? Either sell the franchise for billions or pass it down to his family probably to his son Josh Kroenke. So in 32 years I will either be in my 70s or 6ft under which I can say they didn't leave on watch a 2nd time which they won't anyways. So nothing to worry about and you can move along.
 
Why Kroenke didn't move last year and why no definite NFL LA answer yet:
When Kroenke was good to go to LA, last year, Spanos flipped! telling the NFL he did everything procedurally every year of what was ask of him by the NFL and now this "Johnny come lately" bully Kroenke is just going to take the LA market just like that? Foul, not fair! NFL came back to Kroenke and told him to hold off, let us take a year, slow down, and help your fellow owners to prevent a legal and PR mess on our hands. Kroenke agreed. The result you see for yourself: Oakland, San Diego, and StL all on overdrive in stadium planning! NFL wants the Chargers and Raiders to move to LA and the Rams to stay in StL but Stan Kroenke's elbows are too big and Goodell knows that, there is ultimately no stopping Stan. We are in a holding pattern until early October, for Spanos to figure out what he wants to do.
Scenario #1: If there is a "knock your socks off" deal in San Diego and he stays then Kroenke will be along in LA. The Raiders will not join him as 2nd tenants because Spanos's problem is not just one: need a new stadium. It's two fold: being financial viable which includes business from Southern California other than the San Diego market! This is why if Chargers stay in San Diego, the LA market will be a one team, until enough market research is done to see/show how if adding another tenant in Ingelwood will be detrimental to both the Rams and Chargers. That will be perfect for Kroenke. One he will have the LA market for himself to root himself deeper with corporate sponsorship and get the first shot at new fans (fans who are not right now Rams fans) and two, after he established himself in the LA market, it will be financially beneficial to add a 2nd tenant in his stadium. The money he makes from the 2nd tenant will offset some business loss to the new 2nd team in LA! however this is IF AND ONLY IF, market research shows no financial damage to Spanos and Kroenke with a third team in Southern California. An added bonus, the second home locker will preserve LA's "leverage city" for the NFL.
Scenario #2: San Diego drops the ball again and Spanos finally decides after 54 years he is done in San Diego, then look for a NFL brokered deal between Kroenke and Spanos to share LA. Now, Scenario #2 opens a can of worms:
Worm #1: Do Rams and Chargers stay in their respective cities and move in together in 2018? Not likely, that's six lame duck seasons in total for the NFL. Plus, Kroenke will not agree.
Worm #2: Do the Rams play the Rose Bowl, Chargers play the Coliseum for two years (or the other way around) and they move in together to Ingelwood in 2018? Likely. But that will mean Spanos is now absolutely done with San Diego and has successfully negotiated a temporary stadium for himself in LA. But is Stan happy not getting a running start in LA even though he is taking all the land development risks? Probably not.
Worm #3: Do the Rams move in 2016 to the Rose Bowl, Spanos stays in San Diego and now clearly leverages Kroenke's 2nd home locker room to squeeze the best deal out of San Diego for two years either in good faith or to buy himself time for the stadium to be built in Ingelwood? This is the very likely outcome staring October and moving forward.
By the way, Raiders are irrelevant to the LA market. Most likely they will be pushed by the NFL as 2nd tenants to the 49ers if Oakland drops the ball in keeping them. StL will be placed on the expansion team list if their stadium is shovel and financially ready needing only a new owner's commitment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sam Shown Back Door

< Previous Thread

I tried to watch a college football game tonight and I can't get into it

Next Thread >

Similar threads

Mr. Friscus
How NFL divisions SHOULD be: Regionalized Edition
Replies
4
Views
338
Mr. Friscus
Mr. Friscus
Weatherman2020
Dave Barry’s 2023 Year in Review: Yes, the situation is hopeless
Replies
14
Views
2K
August West
A
L
  • Locked
For the second year in a row,the refs did everything they could to to try and screw the superbowl winner and give it to the losing team.
Replies
16
Views
2K
Zincwarrior
Zincwarrior
basquebromance
Forbes Magazine hit-piece: Meet The Los Angeles Rams’ Billionaire Owner, Sports’ Biggest Mogul And Public Enemy No. 1 In St. Louis
Replies
4
Views
617
LA RAM FAN
L
JGalt
Most Comprehensive List of 2020-2022 Election Fraud
31 32 33
Replies
644
Views
30K
Zafira Cherry
Zafira Cherry

New Topics

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom